[Qgis-developer] QLR relative vs absolute paths - opinions needed

[Richard Duivenvoorde]

On 06-10-14 05:07, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> I would like to get some opinions on how the currently QLR feature in
> 2.4 works.  Currently the QLR will have absolute paths if the project is
> set to have them, or relative if the project is set in that mode.  
> I'm not sure I really like this as it's a bit magic with what you will
> get and means you can't make a relative QLR from a absolute path based
> project.
> 
> Do you think this needs to be an option for each QLR when saving?

Hi Nathan,

I think absoluth path projects and relative projects(!) have different
use-cases. I prefer relative paths, but in organisations with one huge
data-disk, maybe absoluth paths are preferable so project/qlr files can
be moved around easily.

My idea is that one of both is preferred by a user, so one of the
options (relative/absolute) is more or less standard for that user.

Adding an extra option to switch (for a non 'standard' situation) adds
extra option stress. While if clearly documented (or shown in dialog)
that a relative project breeds relative QLR files and vv can be enough?

Then IF a user want a custom type of QLR he/she can create a temp
project for it, change that to the preferred option and create a qlr
with that....

So my stand: keep the dialogs simple (for most common use cases),
especially as there is already a way to do the thing you want to keep an
option for.

See what others think of this.

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde